Sunday, August 13, 2017

Dr. Carl von Schubert said that at the beginning of October, he found the acidity still too high, so had to wait a week to begin harvesting. Overall yields for the estate were 45 hl/ha. Although in dry vintages, Herrenberg can actually be better in Abtsberg, in this vintage, for me, it is Abtsberg that has the slight advantage, although the Herrenbergs are outstanding in their own right.

Simply beautiful wines here. Note especially the first two GG wines that the estate, newly returned to the VDP, has produced. (Continue reading here.)

Follow by Email

About Me

Currently, The Fine Wine Review specializes in wines of Burgundy and Germany, although some coverage is given to other areas, as time permits.
In addition to writing for The Fine Wine Review, Claude Kolm has also written for The World of Fine Wine and Taste Magazine.
The cover article that he wrote on the Domaine de la Romanée-Conti and Aubert de Villaine for The World of Fine Wine can be found at: https://finewinemag.subscribeonline.co.uk/static_content/the-finewinemag/downloads/DRC_by_Kolm.pdf.

CONTACT

e-mail: claude.kolm@gmail.com

Address: 1964 Bush Street

San Francisco, California 94115-3205

Telephone: (415) 922-2755

ABOUT THE SCORES

Two forms of notation are used.

First, wines are rated on a scale of 0 to 100 points, credited as follows: 33 for aroma and bouquet; 33 for mouth; 10 for finish; and 24 for overall impression. The resulting scores can be broadly classified along a continuum, with scores in the upper 90s for truly exceptional wines, wines scoring below 80 being poor, and wines below 75 being unacceptable. A + indicates potential for improvement with age that cannot be judged accurately at this time. These scores have no inherent value and should be regarded simply as an ordering device to indicate an “objective” ranking of the wines, largely free from context.The scores may be considered to indicate a band of comparability from three to five points. Thus, a wine rated 88 would be comparable to wines rated between 87 and 89 or 86 and 90. A wine rated 89 would similarly be comparable to wines rated between 88 and 90 or between 87 and 91. (My experiences with blind tasting have shown that I rarely vary more than two points in my evaluations of a given wine.)

Wine that is not yet in bottle is given a range to the score which is then placed in parentheses.

However, such scores fail to take into account a type of wine’s maximum potential or the context of enjoyment of the wine. For example, a Muscadet may never score 90 points under this system, yet it may be a fine example of a Muscadet. Moreover, in many contexts, considering the accompanying food, occasion, and the company, and 86-point Muscadet, that is, a good Muscadet, may be an impeccable choice of wine, while a 96-point Montrachet would be a totally inappropriate choice. In a like manner, the reader may not always listen to music that is on an equal level, say, with Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, but in many contexts, he or she may in fact enjoy listening to the “less great” music more than the Ninth Symphony. Moreover, such scores wrongly imply a broad leveling of comparability, ignoring the fact that the Muscadet and Montrachet are different wines, creating different expectations and should not be judged as comparable to each other.

As a result, I have devised a second set of notations, on an A, B, C … scale to minimize confusion. This second set of notations is based on typicality of the wine and the expectations for that class or appellation of wine. Therefore, an 85-point Bourgogne Blanc may receive a mark of B+, while an 85-point Montrachet, from the same grape and also a white Burgundy, would receive a mark of C-. In some sense, this is a more “subjective” rating than the numerical system because the qualities of the wine are compared against an ideal, a more difficult task. However, I feel that these notations are the more meaningful for the enlightened consumer who can distinguish more than just white from red. The significance of the various marks can be summarized as follows:

A - An outstanding wine that deserves serious consideration when a wine of this type is sought.

B - A good wine that demonstrates characteristics of its class or appellation.

C - A wine that is acceptable to drink, but other wines showing more character of the class or appellation and better overall quality should be available.

D - A wine that is poor for its class or appellation and may contain some flaws.

F - An unacceptable wine.

I consider the letter grades to be better indicators of quality of a given producer and wine than the numerical scores.

The grades and scores do not take into account overall quality of the vintage. That is, two wines graded 87/B are judged to be of the same quality, even if one is from a great vintage and one is from a poor vintage. Also, scores do not consider prices or the relative values of the wines because the market is so changeable.

Where available, I give information indicating the lot of the wine that I tasted so that consumers can be sure they are buying the same wine reviewed. For most European wines, this is the lot number, preceded by an L, which is required by European Union law. The lot number most frequently is printed on the front label, but it also can appear on the capsule, back label, or stenciled on the bottle itself. Some U.S. importers ask that the lot numbers not be added to the wines exported to the U.S. In place of lot numbers, German wines carry an A.P. number, generally found on the main label.